Methods and systems for reducing burst usage of a networked computer system

ABSTRACT

Methods and systems for reducing burst usage of a networked computer system are described herein. In an embodiment, resource requesters can request, within a time window, resources over a computer network before the resources are available. The resources can then be allocated in batch mode when the resources are available. Thus, resource requests do not have to be processed in real-time, and resource requests can be received before the resources are available.

CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS

This application is a continuation of U.S. Ser. No. 15/477,914, filed Apr. 3, 2017, (now U.S. Pat. No. 9,900,220, issued on Feb. 20, 2018), which is a continuation of U.S. Ser. No. 15/145,268, filed May 3, 2016, (now U.S. Pat. No. 9,614,733, issued on Apr. 4, 2017), which is a continuation-in-part of U.S. Ser. No. 14/843,594, filed Sep. 2, 2015, (now U.S. Pat. No. 9,363,142 issued on Jun. 7, 2016), which is a continuation of U.S. Ser. No. 13/462,277, filed on May 2, 2012 (now U.S. Pat. No. 9,147,170, issued on Sep. 29, 2015), which is a divisional of U.S. Ser. No. 11/703,525, filed on Feb. 7, 2007 (now U.S. Pat. No. 8,176,177, issued on May 8, 2012), which claims the priority benefit of U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 60/771,113, filed on Feb. 7, 2006, the disclosures of each of which are hereby incorporated by reference in their entirety for all purposes. U.S. Ser. No. 15/145,268, filed May 3, 2016, (now U.S. Pat. No. 9,614,733, issued on Apr. 4, 2017) is also a continuation-in-part of U.S. Ser. No. 14/250,167, filed Apr. 10, 2014, which is a divisional of U.S. Ser. No. 11/502,344, filed on Aug. 10, 2006 (now U.S. Pat. No. 8,732,033, issued on May 20, 2014), which is a continuation of U.S. Ser. No. 11/059,990, filed on Feb. 17, 2005 (now U.S. Pat. No. 7,747,507, issued on Jun. 29, 2010), which is a continuation-in-part of U.S. Ser. No. 09/778,606, filed on Feb. 7, 2001 (now U.S. Pat. No. 6,907,405, issued on Jun. 14, 2005), which is a continuation-in-part of U.S. Ser. No. 09/586,927, filed on Jun. 5, 2000 (now U.S. Pat. No. 6,704,713, issued on Mar. 9, 2004), which is a continuation of International Patent Application No. PCT/US00/03136, filed on Feb. 7, 2000, which is a continuation-in-part of U.S. Ser. No. 08/862,547, filed on May 23, 1997 (now U.S. Pat. No. 6,023,685, issued on Feb. 8, 2000), which claims the priority benefit of U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 60/018,211, filed on May 23, 1996, the disclosure of which is hereby incorporated by reference in its entirety for all purposes.

COPYRIGHT NOTICE

A portion of the disclosure of this patent document contains material that is subject to copyright protection. The copyright owner has no objection to the facsimile reproduction by any one of the patent document or the patent disclosure, as it appears in the Patent and Trademark Office patent file or records, but otherwise reserves all copyright rights whatsoever.

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION Field of the Invention

The present invention relates to methods and systems for allocating resources via a network, and in particular, to methods and systems for reducing peak usage of a networked computer system.

Description of the Related Art

Networked computer systems tend to be designed to handle peak loads, such as those that may be encountered during prime hours, to avoid system crashes and overly lengthy response times. However, having a networked computer system configured to handle peak or burst loads often requires expensive infrastructure, and may result in certain system resources, such as processors, memory, and/or network bandwidth, being underutilized for significant periods of time.

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

The present invention relates to methods and systems for allocating resources via a network, and in particular, to methods and systems for reducing peak usage of a networked computer system.

An example embodiment provides a method of reducing burst usage in a networked computer system, the method comprising: transmitting over a network to a plurality of computers information regarding a future first time period when resource requests for a first set of resources will be accepted, wherein resources in the first set of resources are not allocated during the first time period; receiving a plurality of resource requests from a plurality of requesters during the first period of time, wherein the plurality of resource requests are received over the network, wherein the plurality of resource requests include a request from a first of the resource requesters for a preferred resource and an indication as to whether an alternate resource different than the preferred resource would be acceptable; during a second time period beginning after the first time period ends, processing the plurality of resource requests in batch mode using a processing system, the processing further comprising: ranking the plurality of resource requests based on one or more of the following criteria: corresponding locations for some or all of the resource requesters; history of resource requests for some or all of the resource requesters; allocating resources to at least a portion of the plurality requesters based at least in part on corresponding resource request rankings and availability of requested resources; transmitting a communication over the network to one or more requesters receiving an allocation, the communication providing information regarding the corresponding allocation; allocating the alternate resource to the first requester if the first requester indicated a willingness to accept the alternate resource, was not allocated the preferred resource, and if the alternate resource is available to be allocated to the first requester; and transmitting a communication over the network regarding the alternate resource allocation to the first requester.

Another example embodiment provides a method of allocating resources in batch mode via a computer system, the method comprising: transmitting over a network to a plurality of terminals information regarding a future first time period when resource requests for a first set of resources will be accepted but will not be allocated; receiving a plurality of resource requests over the network from a plurality of requesters during the first period of time; ranking the plurality of resource requests based on one or more of the following criteria: location of one or more resource requesters; historical transaction frequency of one or more resource requesters; quantity of previous resource allocations to one or more resource requesters; historical transaction value of resource allocations to one or more resource requesters; information related to reallocation of resources by one or more resource requesters to others; a quantity of resources currently being requested by one or more resource requesters; whether a number of resources currently being requested by one or more resource requesters is an odd or even number of resources; preferred membership status of one or more resource requesters; during a second period of time, allocating resources using a processing system to at least a portion of the plurality requesters based at least in part on corresponding resource request rankings; and transmitting a communication over the network to at least one requester allocated a requested resource, the communication including a notification regarding the requested resource allocation.

Another example embodiment provides a method of performing delayed allocations of tickets via a computer system, the method comprising: transmitting over a network to a first terminal associated with a user information regarding a first time period when ticket requests for a first event will be accepted, wherein a ticket for the first event provides one or more people with event access; receiving a first plurality of ticket requests over the network from a first plurality of users during the first period of time; processing the first plurality of ticket requests using a processing system during a second time period, wherein the second time period begins after the first plurality of ticket requests has been received; ranking the first plurality of ticket requests based on one or more of the following criteria: a location of one or more users requesting tickets; historical transaction frequency with respect to ticket purchases of one or more users requesting tickets; quantity of previous tickets purchased by one or more users requesting tickets; value of ticket purchases made by one or more users requesting tickets; information related to a resale of tickets by one or more users requesting tickets; the quantity of event seating currently being requested by one or more users requesting tickets; whether one or more users is requesting an odd number of event seats; preferred membership status of one or more users requesting tickets; allocating tickets to at least a portion of the plurality users based at least in part on corresponding ticket request rankings; and transmitting a communication to one or more users allocated a requested ticket.

An example embodiment provides a method of performing allocations of tickets via a computer system, the method comprising: receiving a first plurality of ticket requests over the network from a first plurality of users during the first period of time; ranking the first plurality of ticket requests based on one or more of the following criteria: a location of one or more users requesting tickets; historical transaction frequency with respect to ticket purchases of one or more users requesting tickets; quantity of previous tickets purchased by one or more users requesting tickets; value of ticket purchases made by one or more users requesting tickets; information related to a resale of tickets by one or more users requesting tickets; allocating tickets to at least a portion of the plurality users based at least in part on corresponding ticket request rankings; and transmitting a communication to one or more users allocated a requested ticket.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

Embodiments of the present invention will now be described with reference to the drawings summarized below. These drawings and the associated description are provided to illustrate example embodiments of the invention, and not to limit the scope of the invention.

FIG. 1, including FIGS. 1A-B, illustrates an example system embodiment that can be used in conjunction with the processes described herein.

FIG. 2 illustrates an example resource allocation process, including batch allocation.

FIG. 3 illustrates an example resource allocation batch process.

FIG. 4 illustrates an example resource preference user interface.

FIG. 5 illustrates an example delivery specification user interface.

FIG. 6 a log in user interface.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS

The present invention relates to methods and systems for allocating resources via a network, and in particular, is related to methods and systems for reducing peak usage of a networked computer system.

As will be described in greater detail below, an online system accepts resource order submissions over a network during a window of time and then closes that window. Rather than assigning resources (e.g., inventory, such as event tickets) to orders in real time, resource requests are made prior to resource availability, and resources are then optionally assigned in a batch mode. Thus, in an example embodiment, a presale can be conducted, wherein users submit purchase requests, and optionally users are not assured or guaranteed they will receive the requested inventory until the allocation process has been performed.

By way of illustrative example, after the submission window has closed, inventory is selectively assigned to orders submitted within the window based on one or more criteria. For example, inventory assignment can be based on (i) a random allocation of inventory to requesting users, (ii) allocating inventory based on a user's transaction frequency and/or amount (e.g., based on how often the user purchases inventory, the amount of inventory the user has purchased in the past, the total dollar value of inventory purchased by the user, and/or based on how recently the user purchased inventory, etc.) (iii) low amount of tickets ordered (e.g., allocating inventory based on how an infrequent a user the user is), (iv) past resale activity by user (e.g., how recently and/or how often the user has resold inventory previously purchased, such as that originally sold, then resold and tracked via a ticket system), (v) the price offered by the user for the inventory (for an example of allocation based on price offered by the user, see U.S. Ser. No. 14/250,167, filed Apr. 10, 2014, the disclosure of which is hereby incorporated by reference in its entirety for all purposes), (vi) seat location preferences, where the inventory is related to seats (e.g., seats at a concert, sporting event, an airplane, etc.), (vii) the amount of inventory the user is currently requesting (e.g., how many seat tickets), (viii) whether the user is currently requesting an odd or an even amount of inventory, (ix) whether the user has indicated that the user is willing to accept alternate inventory (e.g., tickets for other event performances); (x) how to increase or maximize total inventory sales (e.g., how to reduce the number of empty seats for an event using seat packing); (xi) whether the user has a preferred membership (e.g., which may be obtained by paying a fee or by being subscriber of a selected other service, such as of a certain credit or charge card service); (xii) event timing preferences (for an example of allocation based on event timing preferences, see U.S. Ser. No. 14/250,167, filed Apr. 10, 2014, the disclosure of which is hereby incorporated by reference in its entirety for all purposes); and/or (xiii) other criteria.

Optionally, the allocation of inventory to order submissions within the submission (e.g., presale) window is not based on the date or timing of the submission within that window (e.g., allocations are optionally not made on a first come first serve basis). This enables humans and machines to better compete for inventory fairly, rather than solely on how quickly users submitted purchase requests within the submission window. Optionally, the allocation process described herein provides demand information to help determine whether to acquire or create additional inventory or whether to adjust inventory pricing.

The processes and systems described herein can provide an enhanced technique for allocating inventory (e.g., tickets), that is in high demand to accomplish certain distribution, allocation, and/or pricing goals. In addition, utilization of the processes and systems described herein can reduce the needed ticket system infrastructure by reducing burst loads on the system.

Throughout the following description, the term “Web site” is used to refer to a user-accessible server site that implements the basic World Wide Web standards for the coding and transmission of hypertextual documents. These standards currently include HTML (the Hypertext Markup Language), which can be used to generate Web pages, and HTTP (the Hypertext Transfer Protocol). It should be understood that the term “site” or “computer system” are not intended to imply a single geographic location, as a Web or other network site can, for example, include multiple geographically-distributed computer systems that are appropriately linked together. Furthermore, while the following description relates to an embodiment utilizing the Internet and related protocols, other networks, such as networked interactive televisions and wireless phones, and other protocols, may be used as well.

In addition, unless otherwise indicated, the functions described herein may be performed by software modules including executable code and instructions running on one or more general-purpose computers. The computers can include one or more central processing units (CPUs) that execute program code and process data, memory, including one or more of volatile memory, such as random access memory (RAM) for temporarily storing data and data structures during program execution, non-volatile memory, such as a hard disc drive, optical drive, or FLASH drive, for storing programs and data, including databases, which may be referred to as a “system database,” and a wired and/or wireless network interface for accessing an intranet and/or Internet.

In addition, the computers can include a display for displaying user interfaces, data, and the like, and one or more user input devices, such as a keyboard, mouse, pointing device, microphone and/or the like, used to navigate, provide commands, enter information, provide search queries, and/or the like. However, the systems described herein can also be implemented using special purpose computers, terminals, state machines, and/or hardwired electronic circuits.

Further, the example processes described herein do not necessarily have to be performed in the described sequence, and not all states have to be reached or performed. In addition, certain process states that are illustrated or described as being serially performed herein, can be performed in parallel.

While the following discussion may often relate to tickets (e.g., a voucher to indicate that one has paid for or is entitled to admission to a theatre, concert, amusement park, zoo, aquarium, museum, concert, or other attraction, or entitled to travel on an airplane, public transit, train, or other mode of transportation) in order to illustrate the use and application of the disclosed systems and methods, the disclosed systems and methods can be applied to other types of units, inventory, or finite resources, such as products or other priority rights.

A significant problem posed with respect to the allocation of finite resources via a networked computer based system, where the demand is greater than the supply, is that large numbers of users will often attempt to access, within a relatively brief amount of time, the computer system allocating the finite resource. Often, this results in peak or burst loads on the allocating computer system and network that exceed the available bandwidth of the allocating computer system and/or network. This can result in bottlenecks and user access blockages.

Conventionally, in order to accommodate such peak and burst loads, the allocating computer system operator needs to configure the computer system (e.g., via additional servers, higher speed intranets, etc.) to handle peak loads that are often far in excess of the typical load. Similarly, the operator may need to lease or acquire higher speed or additional network lines in order to handle the peak load, as will need to lease or acquire the corresponding hardware (modems, switches, routers, etc.) to interface to the network lines. The foregoing approach results in higher system acquisition, lease and maintenance costs.

A nonlimiting example of a finite resource that may be allocated via an online computer system are event tickets. For example, the event tickets may be for a sporting event, a concert, a show, a movie, or for other entertainment events at a given venue. By way of further example, the finite resource may be for a plane ticket (e.g., a regular ticket or a ticket acquired with frequent flier miles), or for a right to buy a product offered in limited amounts.

Thus, for example, if an online ticket system is selling tickets for a highly popular event (e.g., the Super bowl, a Rolling Stones concert, opening day at an amusement park, etc.), at a large venue (e.g., seating 60,000 people), or with many performances at a venue with relatively fewer seats (e.g., a play having 100 scheduled performances at a venue with 1500 seats), then as soon as the tickets are put on sale, the online ticket system will often experience a burst of online users attempting to purchase tickets via the agency website in a relatively short period of time. Such a burst load can overwhelm the ticket system, resulting in user access blockages.

An example online purchase process may include some or all of the following acts: providing the user over a network (e.g., the Internet) an event selection form, receiving the user event selection via the form; providing the user with a ticket request form; receiving the user ticket request criteria (e.g., number of tickets, price range, seat section, etc.); verifying that the user request complies with ticket purchase guidelines (e.g., does not exceed a specified maximum number of tickets); providing over the network a form used to better ensure that an automated program (e.g., a software robot) is not being used to purchase the ticket (e.g., by presenting a word that the user needs to type into a field); verifying that the user correctly completed the form; determining what are the available seats that meet the user's criteria; providing, over the network, the user with a listing of the seats being temporarily reserved for the user pending the user's purchase; providing over the network a ticket delivery instruction form; receiving or the network user ticket delivery instructions; receiving user registration information (e.g., name, contact information (such as street addresses, city, state, zip code, email address, phone number, instant messaging identifier, etc.) desired password, etc.) or account log in information (e.g., a password and/or a user identifier); receiving over the network payment information (e.g., credit card number and expiration date); verifying the payment information, processing the issuance of the ordered tickets; and send a purchase confirmation to the user (e.g., via a Web page, an email, and/or an SMS message). In addition, the online ticket system has to determine when a user has abandoned a purchase process (e.g., by determining if the user failed to complete a purchase process step within a designated period of time), and then has to release tickets reserved for that user so that other users can purchase the tickets.

If the ticket system has to successfully perform that above process for thousands of users within a short period of time (e.g., within 15 or 30 minutes), the ticket system will need an expensive backend infrastructure and high bandwidth access to the Internet.

In one embodiment, in order to reduce the peak or burst loads on the ticket system, and hence, to correspondingly optionally reduce the needed ticket system bandwidth, rather than just taking purchase requests for tickets when the tickets are actually available for sale, a presale process is provided. As will be discussed in greater detail, users can request tickets before the tickets actually go on sale. Once the tickets are put on sale, users can be randomly selected (e.g., the date and time of the presale user ticket request during the presale window does not affect the quality or quantity of tickets they will allocated) by the ticket system to receive tickets that meet the corresponding user ticket criteria and other criteria.

Optionally, the actual ticket allocation can be performed in a batch mode, and the timing of the allocation process can be selected so that it is performed when the ticket system is not otherwise heavily loaded (e.g., between 2:00 AM and 3:00 AM). Hence, rather than allocating the best ticket to the first user to request a ticket, the second best ticket to the second user to request a ticket, and so on, in a first come first serve manner, the order in which users made presale requests for a given set of tickets (e.g., tickets for a particular event or section) will not correspond or not have a one-to-one correspondence to the order in which tickets are allocated.

Because, for example, if a user who requests a ticket two weeks after the start of a presale has the same chance of being allocated a given ticket as a user who requests a ticket on the presale start date, there will be significantly less motivation on the part of users to rush to request tickets on the presale start date. Instead, online ticket requests to the ticket system are likely to be more evenly distributed over the presale period, rather than be heavily front loaded during the start of the sale. Hence, optionally, the ticket system infrastructure can be comparatively reduced.

In addition, there will likely be less motivation for certain users to use automated programs to reserve seats, as there will not be a benefit to being an early ticket requester. Users may view the foregoing allocation process as being more fair, as users are not placed at a disadvantage just because they did not have access to a computer (to request tickets) at the time the sale or presale began.

Optionally, when the actual sale starts, tickets that have not been allocated to presale requesters (e.g., if the number of requested tickets is less than the available number of tickets, or if some tickets were not offered to presale requesters) can be sold on a first come first serve basis, or on other basis.

The following is an illustrative example process. A determination is made as to when a presale should begin for a given event. The start and end of the presale period may be consistent for a given type of event. For example, if the event is a rock or pop concert, the presale period may typically be set to start four weeks (or other period of time) prior to the actual sale, and the presale ends immediately before the actual sale. By way of further example, if the event is a basketball game, the presale period may typically be set to start three months (or other period of time) prior to the actual sale, and the presale ends two weeks before the actual sale.

The period start may also be set, based at least in part, on historical sales statistics for a given event type, a performer, a team, a calendar period, etc. For example, the historical sales information can be retrieved from a storage location, such as an historical sales information database. A formula or algorithm, stored as executable code in computer readable memory, can be used to automatically calculate the presale start state relative to the actual sale start date, or a human can make presale start date determination.

For example, if a concert for a performer sold out in one day for a previous performance in a given city (indicating that there will be a high demand for tickets for the current event performance at issue), then the presale start date can be set to two months before the actual sale start day so that users will feel less pressure to quickly submit requests. By way of further example, if a concert for a performer sold out in three months for a previous performance in a given city, then the presale start date is set to one month before the actual sale start day, as it is less likely that there will be a large number of ticket requests in a short period of time. Thus, optionally, the start date can be dynamically determined based on historical sales patterns using information stored in computer readable memory. The presale start time can be selected based on other criteria as well.

Optionally, an initial presale end date may be extended up to the actual onsale date based on the number of submitted requests and/or the number of tickets requested during at least a portion of the initial presale window. Optionally, even after an initial presale window has ended, a new presale window may be established, with a start date after the end date of the initial presale window.

Optionally, all the available tickets are made available to presale requesters. Optionally, instead, only a subset of available tickets is made available to presale requesters. For example, a portion of seat tickets may be reserved for purchasers who submit requests during the onsale, as opposed to the presale, period. Optionally, the number of seats for which tickets are available during the presale is smaller than the number of seats for which tickets are available after the presale. Optionally, the number of seats for which tickets are available during the presale is larger than the number of seats for which tickets are available after the presale.

Optionally, a user may be permitted to cancel a presale request within a specified time period. For example the cancellation period may extend to the start of the actual sale, to a certain period of time after the user submitted the presale request, or a predetermined period of time before the actual sale starts. If the presale is setup so that a user can cancel a presale request, the user is informed of the cancellation guidelines and period via a presale Web page. Optionally, if the user cancels a request, the user is charged a fee as a result of the cancellation.

By way of example, users can be informed (e.g., via email, text messaging, a Web page hosted by the ticket same, print advertisement, etc.) of an upcoming event and provided information regarding one or more of the presale start date, the presale end date, the sale start date or the sale end date.

Using a browser or other interface executing on a terminal (e.g., a personal computer, a networked personal digital assistant, a networked television, a smart phone, etc.), a user can access a presale form via a ticket system Web page. The user may access the presale Web page via a landing page that lists presale events, via a specific presale page that lists presale events, by searching for the event via a search field, via a link provided to the user in an email, or otherwise. Optionally, the presale Web page can be provided online prior to the presale start date, with the page informing visitors of the presale start date, and without accepting presale requests.

The presale Web page can provide ticket request guidelines or rules. For example, the guidelines can specify a maximum number of tickets that a user can request for a given event, whether the user has to request an even number of tickets, etc. Optionally, the user may also be informed that the user will be required to provide payment information which will be used to pay for the tickets should the user be allocated tickets once the sale begins.

One or more fields may be provided via which the user can specify the number of tickets being requested, the price or price range of the requested tickets, and/or the desired seating section. Further, the user may optionally request that the user be allocated the best available seats. The user may optionally be provided with a field via which the user indicates that the user is willing to accept seats at a different cost or in a different location (e.g., a worse seating section).

The user may also be provided with an option of selecting one or more alternate related events (e.g., different performance dates for a play) in the event the user is not allocated tickets for the selected event. For example, three fields may be provided on the Web page, wherein the user is asked to select: a most preferred alternate event performance using a first field (e.g., by selecting from a set of listed performances displayed in a drop down or pop up menu); a second most preferred alternate event performance using a second field; a third most preferred alternate event performance using a third field. The user can optionally specify no alternative event performances, or less than three alternate event performances. Optionally, the user may be required to specify at least one alternate performance, if such is available.

The user selections are stored in a corresponding database which can be accessed when performing the seat allocation. Optionally, a field can be provided wherein the user can specify whether or not the user is willing to accept tickets for non-contiguous sets (e.g., seats spread out over more than one row or section, or seats within a single row, but wherein the seats are not contiguous).

Once the user has entered the requested information and selections, the user can activate a “submit” button. Optionally, an optical barrier (e.g., a word verification page) or other device may be provided to better prevent automated programs from submitting requests. Automated programs are less likely to be able to read the presented word and enter the word into the designated field.

Once the user enters the designated word into the field, the user activates a “continue” button. The ticket system verifies that the word was entered correctly, and if so, a delivery page is transmitted to the user terminal, the delivery Web page listing different delivery options and associated fees (if any). The user can select a desired delivery type (e.g., email, via a Web page, 2.sup.nd day morning delivery, 2.sup.nd day delivery, standard delivery, will call, etc.) by clicking on, or otherwise selecting the listed delivery type. Optionally, the system will calculate the total cost of the tickets, delivery fees, service fees, and the total of the foregoing, and will transmit the cost and fee information to the user via the user terminal for presentation to the user. The user can activate a submit button, and a payment page is presented to the user. The user may be asked to enter a credit card number, expiration date, a credit card identifier (CIN).

The Web page may further include user registration fields in which the user is to enter requested information, such as contact information (such as street addresses, city, state, zip code, email address, phone number, instant messaging identifier, etc.), user identifier, desired password, etc., or account log in information (e.g., a password and/or a user identifier). Optionally, the user will be presented with another optical barrier Web page.

Optionally, the ticket system checks to make sure a delivery type was selected, verify the credit card number, expiration date, and CIN, and determine if the optical barrier entry from the user is correct. If an error occurs with respect to the foregoing, the user is optionally asked to provide or correct the corresponding information. If the user fails to correct the errors or provides a cancel instruction (e.g., via a cancel button, by not responding, by logging out, or otherwise), or otherwise does not complete the form, the user's request is optionally rejected, and tickets will not be allocated based on the request.

Optionally, the user is not required to provide payment, payment information and/or shipping information until after tickets have been allocated to the user. Optionally, instead, the user is charged for the requested tickets even before the tickets have been allocated to the user, and the charge is cancelled or the user is credited the charged amount in the event the user is not allocated the requested tickets.

Once the presale period is closed for the tickets at issue, the ticket system does not accept additional presale ticket requests for those tickets, unless a new presale window is established.

Once the tickets are available for allocation (e.g., once an actual sale period has started or other time period), the tickets can be allocated using a batch process. Optionally, the allocation process can be performed when ticket system computers are lightly loaded (e.g., at night, when access by users tends to be low) or upon the occurrence of a selected event. The batch processing may be performed, by way of example, immediately after the end of the presale, 1, 2, 6, 12, 24, 36, or other specified number of hours after the end of (or the beginning of) the presale, or other time period. Optionally, general tickets sales via the ticket system website are restricted or not allowed, until the batch process of allocating tickets to the presale requesters is complete. For example, the batch allocation process can be performed from 2:00 AM to 4:00 AM on a given day, and the general sale of tickets to other users is later initiated at 8:00 AM that day.

As similarly discussed above, the allocation process to presale requesters can be based on one or more criteria. For example, the ticket system is optionally programmed to allocate to a user requesting more than one ticket, tickets for contiguous seats, to avoid the user's group being split up among over multiple rows and/or sections. Hence, in order to avoid empty seats that might result from an inability to fit a user's group into the empty seats, the ticket system optionally allocates tickets, taking into account the number of tickets being requested for each of several users, and assigns seats and allocates tickets so as to keep groups together in contiguous seats, while also reducing or minimizing unfilled seats. For example, users requesting a smaller, even number of tickets (e.g., 2 tickets) are optionally allocated tickets before users requesting a larger number of tickets (e.g., 3 or more tickets). By way of further example, users requesting an even number of tickets are optionally allocated tickets before those requesting an odd number of tickets.

By way of further example, preference may be given to requesting users based, at least in part, on their location or their distance from a venue or other designated area. For example, tickets may be allocated to users based, at least in part, on their mailing and/or billing zip codes, where users in a certain set of zip codes (e.g., zip codes for areas closer to the event venue) are allocated tickets before those in other zip codes. By way of further example, optionally, the best seat ticket(s) can be allocated to the user that is closest to the event venue, the second best seat ticket(s) can be allocated to the user that is the second closet to the event venue, and so on until either all the seats in the relevant set of seats are allocated, or until all requesting users have been allocated tickets.

By way of still further example, tickets may be allocated based on whether the user has purchased a ticket via the ticket system within a certain period of time. For example, in order to encourage ticket requesters that have not recently utilized the ticket system to utilize the ticket system with greater frequency, those users that have not ordered and/or requested tickets via the ticket system within a selected period of time (e.g., 6 months or 1 year), may be allocated tickets before those users that have utilized the system more frequently. By way of further example, optionally, the best seat ticket(s) can be allocated to the user that that have never previously utilized the ticket service, the second best seat ticket(s) can be allocated to the user for which the most time has elapsed since the user previously utilized the ticket system, and so on until either all the seats in the relevant set of seats are allocated, or until all requesting users have been allocated tickets. Optionally, ties (e.g., two users that have the same elapsed time since their last previous use), can be broken based on one or more other criteria, such as the number of tickets requested, the users' locations, the frequency of a user's ticket purchases, one or more of the other criteria discussed herein, etc.

By way of yet further example, tickets may be allocated based on the frequency with which a user has purchased tickets via the ticket system. For example, in order to reward frequent ticket purchaser, the greater the user ticket purchase frequency, the higher priority the user will have in being allocated tickets. Optionally, ties (e.g., two users that have the same elapsed time since their last previous use), can be broken based on one or more other criteria, such as the number of tickets requested, the users' locations, one or more of the other criteria discussed herein, etc.

By way of still further example, tickets may be allocated based on a ranking of the requests made by the presale requesters. For example, a request made during the onsale period may include data representing an amount for ticket(s) and a preference for a time an event may start. In some examples, after the presale period ends, the tickets may be ranked, selected, and accordingly associated with requesters. For an example of allocation based on ranking, see U.S. Ser. No. 14/250,167, filed Apr. 10, 2014, the disclosure of which is hereby incorporated by reference in its entirety for all purposes.

By way of illustration, once the presale has closed (e.g., during the batch processing), the user requests can be ranked or ordered based on one or more of the foregoing criteria. For example, the user requests can first be ranked or ordered based on the quantity of seats being requested. For those user requests that are assigned the same ranking or position in an ordering, those requests can be re-ranked or re-ordered based on other criteria, such as the user location. Similarly, for those users that have the same ranking or ordering after the first re-ranking, a further re-ranking or re-ordering can be performed based on still additional criteria (e.g., the frequency of ticket purchases), and so on. Thus, one, two, three, four, five, six or more criteria can be used to rank and/or re-rank ticket requests.

Optionally, to the extent that certain requests still have the same ranking, a “tied” request can randomly or alphabetically (e.g., based on the user last and/or first name) be assigned a higher or lower ranking relative to another tied request so that each user request has a unique ranking. Optionally, when there is a “tied” request, the user that submitted the ticket request first is given a higher ranking. Tickets (associated with corresponding reserved seats if the event is not a general admission event) are then allocated to the users based at least in part on the request rankings. For example, the highest ranked user request (e.g., for a given user specified price and/or section) can be assigned the best available (e.g., the estimated most preferred) seats within the price and/or section category specified by the user. The next highest ranked user request can be assigned the second best available seats, etc. Thus, in addition to the user requests being ranked or ordered, some or all of the venue seats are optionally ranked or ordered based, at least in part, or the perceived to expected desirability of the seats. The seat ticket allocations are optionally therefore based on both ticket request rankings or order, and seat rankings or order.

After the ticket assignments have been performed, the users assigned tickets can have their payment information verified to determine if it (e.g., a credit card or charge card) is still valid (e.g., by check with the credit card issuer or agent). If a user's payment mechanism is declined or otherwise cannot be used, optionally, the user may be informed of the problem and/or asked for an alternative payment mechanism within a specified period of time. If the user fails to do so, the user is not allocated a ticket and the next higher ranked user request having matching seat criteria is allocated the seat tickets that had previously been assigned to the user's whose payment mechanism has been declined.

Optionally, instead, if a user's payment mechanism is declined or otherwise cannot be used, that user is not asked to provide an alternative form of payment, and instead the user's request is removed from the queue without such a request. Then, as similarly discussed above, a re-ranking is performed without the now removed user request (e.g., the next higher ranked user request having the same seat criteria, such as the same number of seat tickets, at the same cost level, is allocated the seat tickets that had previously been assigned to the user's whose payment mechanism has been declined). Further, rather than assigning the tickets to the next highest ranking matching user request, user requests can be re-ranked, and the allocation process can be based on the re-ranking.

After a user's payment mechanism has been validated (or after a set of users have had their payment mechanisms validated), the user's payment mechanism is charged for the tickets, as well as associated service and delivery fees, the user is notified of the charge and/or the ticket allocation (e.g., the user is informed that the user has been allocated a ticket, the seats, if any, the user has been allocated, the ticket amount, related taxes and service fees, the total transaction cost, etc., via email, a Web page, an SMS message, an AIM (AOL® Instant Messenger) message, Apple iChat audio/video message, other instant message, or otherwise), and the ticket is delivered to the user in accordance with the user's earlier instructions.

Example embodiments will now be discussed with reference to the figures. FIG. 1, including FIGS. 1A-B, illustrates an example embodiment that can be used in conjunction with the processes described herein. Not all of the illustrated systems and components need to be included in the ticketing system, and other systems and architectures can be used as well. With reference to FIG. 1, a user terminal 102 is coupled to an example ticket system 104 over the Internet 105 using HTTP/HTTPS or other protocol. An example web proxy system 106 includes an optional load balancer 108 and web proxy processors 110, and can selectively block or route an inbound request from a user browser executing on the terminal 102 to an appropriate internal destination, (e.g., a queue or other destination server).

The illustrated example ticket system 104 includes example Web application system 112, which includes an optional load balancer 114 and Web application processors 116. A general transaction system 118 includes an optional load balancer 120 and transaction processors 122 that are used to generate transactional pages, populate data caches, provide logic and/or rules for the transaction flows, and to sequence requests. A cache cluster system 124 includes an optional load balancer 126 and processors 128. The cache cluster system 124 caches data and states for quick access by other system components.

An example ticket processor system 130 is provided that includes an optional load balancer 132 and processors 134. The example ticket processors 134 conduct and/or manage the event ticketing, perform batch processing of ticket requests, keep track of tickets being sold, the status of presales and sales, the current ticket requesters or purchasers, the number of seat tickets being requested by corresponding ticket requesters, the price, section, and/or location of the requested seats, whether a given ticket requester is willing to accept tickets for an alternative performance, the requesting ticket delivery methods, the number of seats being offered during the presale and sale, ticket prices, and so on. A session cluster system 136 includes an optional load balancer 138 and a plurality of processors 140 and is used to manage sessions.

A member transaction repository database 142 stores user contact information, billing information, preferences, account status, and the like, that can be accessed by other portions of the ticket system 104. The database 142 can also store a user opt-in for notifications regarding tickets (e.g., whether the user was allocated a ticket during the batch allocation process).

An event database 144 stores information regarding events, including, by way of example, the venue, artist, date, time, additional performances, and the like. The event database 144 or a separate database includes ticket information records, including one or more of barcode information, event name, event date, seat identifier, ticket holder name or other identifier of a current ticket holder, names or other identifiers of past holders of the ticket, a ticket valid/invalid indicator, and/or an indicator that as to whether the ticket has been used. The database 144, or another database, can also store information regarding a presale beginning date, a presale end date, an onsale beginning date, an onsale end date, the maximum quantity of Units a user can request or purchase, and so on.

An event database server 146 is used to provide event database access to other portions of the ticket system.

An example database 148 is provided that stores historical event information (e.g., of events that have already taken place), such as historical information regarding events, optionally including the event date, the event type, the identity of the performer/team, the event venue, the event presale start date (if there was a presale), the event presale end date, information relating to the number of requesters per day for each day of the presale, the total number of tickets assigned to presale requesters, the total number of tickets made available to presale ticket requesters, the event onsale start date, the event onsale end date, information relating to the number of ticket purchases per day for each day of the onsale, the total number of tickets sold during the onsale period, the total number of event tickets offered for sale during the onsale period, as well as other optional information. Optionally, some or all of the foregoing information can be used in setting presale start and end dates for future events, as well as sale start and end dates.

A host network system 150 is also optionally provided.

FIG. 2 illustrates an example resource allocation process, including batch allocation. At state 202, historical information regarding previous events is retrieved from a database. For example, information regarding one or more events that have already occurred can be retrieved, including some or all of the following information: event date, event type (e.g., sports event, musical event, travel event, etc.), identity of the performer/team (if applicable), event venue, event presale start date (if there was a presale), event presale end date, information relating to the number of requesters per day for each day of the presale, total number of tickets assigned to presale requesters, total number of tickets made available to presale ticket requesters, event onsale start date, event onsale end date, information relating to the number of ticket purchases per day for each day of the onsale, total number of tickets sold during the onsale period, total number of event tickets offered for sale during the onsale period, etc. Information can also include types of information disclosed in U.S. application Ser. No. 11/951,988, filed on Dec. 6, 2007 and/or U.S. Application No. 60/873,324, filed on Dec. 7, 2006, each of which is hereby incorporated by reference in its entirety for all purposes.

At state 204, some or all of the information retrieved at state 202 is used to automatically select a presale start date (which can be manually modified). At state 206, some or all of the information retrieved at state 202 is used to automatically select a presale end date (which can be manually modified). Optionally, instead, the presale end date can be set to end at, or about, the beginning of the onsale process.

At state 208, the presale begins. The system receives presale ticket requests via online forms (e.g., accessed via user terminals), a kiosk, or other user interface (e.g., via a phone system, such as an interactive voice response system or via a human in a call center), and stores the requests and related information in a database. Users may be requested to provide some or all of the following information: the number of tickets being requested, the price or price range of the requested tickets, the desired seating section (including “the best available seats” as an option), acceptable alternate performances, and whether the user is willing to accept tickets for non-contiguous seats. Because the tickets are not yet on sale, in some circumstances, the ticket price may not have been finalized. Therefore, the user may be advised that the final price of a ticket may be different than that displayed by the system and requested to approve a ticket charge within a price range. For example, the user may be informed that a ticket price will have a final price within the range of $35-$42 and the user may be asked to provide acceptance for such ticket price range. The user's acceptance or refusal is stored in memory.

The system optionally monitors the total number of requests at a given point in time, the rate of requests, the number of seats being requested, and/or the time the requests are being submitted. At state 210, which can be performed in parallel with state 208, a determination is optionally made as to whether the presale start date should be extended or altered based on some or all of the monitored request related information. For example, if ticket requests are being received at a slower than expected rate, the system can extend the presale end date to enable more users to request tickets during the presale window. If a decision has been made to extend the end date, the process proceeds to state 212, and a new presale end date is set. The process the proceeds from state 212 to state 208, and additional presale ticket requests are received.

The ticket presale ends at state 214. At state 216, batch processing is performed on the ticket requests as described herein, and those users that are allocated tickets are charged, and the tickets are delivered. For example, the tickets can be downloaded over the network to the user terminal from the ticketing website and printed by the user; sent as an email attachment or embedded in an email, transmitted to a mobile phone, stored in a smart card (e.g., a pocket size or substantially credit card sized card that includes processor and can store certain information in a tamper-resistant manner), or otherwise provided. The tickets (whether in a hardcopy form or stored electronically) can include scannable barcode information and/or have human readable indicia indicating the event name, event date/time, one or more seat numbers (e.g., for a reserved seat event), a ticket recipient name, and/or other information. At state 218, the online sale begins for the now available tickets. Thus, users can now purchase tickets in substantially real time (as opposed to in a batch process) via the ticket system Web site, kiosks, or otherwise. Optionally, states 216 and 218 are performed at least partially in parallel, or are performed serially.

FIG. 3 illustrates an example resource request batch process. By way of example, the illustrated batch process can be performed at state 216, illustrated in FIG. 2. At state 302, user requests are retrieved from a database and ranked or ordered based on one or more criteria, such as the example criteria discussed herein (user location, purchase histories, membership in a preferred group or affiliate, etc.). At state 304, a determination is made as to whether there are user requests that have been given the same ranking. At state 306, user requests that have the same ranking are optionally re-ranked or ordered based on additional criteria, such as one or more of the criteria discussed herein. At state 308, seat tickets are allocated to users based on their associated ranking and the seat ranking (e.g., those users with better rankings are optionally allocated seats with better rankings, as compared to users with worse rankings).

At state 310, a verification is performed as to whether a given user's payment vehicle can be used to pay for the ticket purchase (e.g., if the payment vehicle is a credit card, a determination is optionally made as to whether the credit card code is valid, whether the credit card has expired, whether the credit card had its credit limit exceeded, and/or whether the credit card charge has been denied).

At state 314, if the payment verification failed for a user, the user's allocated seat tickets are allocated to another user. For example, optionally all the user requests can be re-ranked, and a re-allocation of seat tickets performed, without including the user whose payment verification failed. Optionally, instead, only a portion of the user requests (e.g., those with a lower ranking than the removed user) are re-ranked, and a re-allocation of seat tickets performed, without including the user whose payment verification failed. Users who were allocated seats, and whose payment vehicles were verified, are charged for the allocated tickets and associated service and delivery fees. At state 316, the tickets are delivered to users in accordance with user instructions retrieved from a database. Optionally, the payment vehicle verification is performed prior to state 302, so that user requests can be removed prior to the initial ranking process if the verification failed.

FIG. 4 illustrates an example presale ticket request form, although forms having fewer, more, or different fields can be used as well. The example presale request form includes information regarding the event for which tickets are being requested. For example, the artist/performer/sports team name, the venue name, the venue location, and the event date are optionally presented. In addition, the ticket prices (or estimated price range) for available sections or seating areas are presented. Some or all of the following fields are provided, via which the user can provide entries via a drop down menu, by typing values into the fields, or otherwise: a number of tickets field (wherein the user can designate the number of seat tickets the user is requesting), a price range field (wherein the user can designate the price range of the seat tickets the user is requesting), a section field, a location field, an alternative performance selection performance field (wherein the user can select an alternate performance date or an alternate event, should the user not be allocated a ticket for the event at issue), and/or an accept noncontiguous seats field (wherein the user can indicate that the user is willing to accept noncontiguous seat assignments). The selections and information provided by the user via the form is stored in a database in association with a user and/or session identifier. The information can later be retrieved by the system for ticket seat allocation.

FIG. 5 illustrates an example form used to select a ticket delivery method. For example, the user can optionally specify that the tickets are to be delivered via email, via a Web page, via expedited delivery (e.g., overnight, two day, or Saturday delivery), or via will call (e.g., where the user picks up the tickets at the box office on the show date). Optionally, a fee is charged for certain delivery methods. The example form illustrated in FIG. 4 presents the current total ticket cost, shipping cost, service and handling fee, and overall total cost for the tickets and delivery method requested by the user. The user optionally can click on a “recalculate” button, and in response, the system may recalculate the foregoing costs and fees, and cause the recalculated costs and fees to be presented on the form or other user interface.

FIG. 6 illustrates an example user log-in form which requests that the user enter their first name, email address, zip code, and password. The foregoing information can be used to access user account information from a database and to store user ticket requests and other information in the database in association with a user identifier.

Although this invention has been disclosed in the context of certain embodiments and examples, it will be understood by those skilled in the art that the present invention extends beyond the specifically disclosed embodiments to other alternative embodiments and/or uses of the invention and obvious modifications and equivalents thereof. In addition, while a number of variations of the invention have been shown and described in detail, other modifications, which are within the scope of this invention, will be readily apparent to those of skill in the art based upon this disclosure. It is also contemplated that various combinations or subcombinations of the specific features and aspects of the embodiments may be made and still fall within the scope of the invention. Accordingly, it should be understood that various features and aspects of the disclosed embodiments can be combined with, or substituted for one another in order to form varying modes of the disclosed invention. Thus, it is intended that the scope of the present invention herein disclosed should not be limited by the particular disclosed embodiments described above. 

What is claimed is:
 1. A computer-implemented method for allocating access rights to resources, the method comprising: storing data representing a plurality of access rights to a resource, each access right corresponding to access-right priority data; receiving, over a network, a plurality of access-right requests during a first time period, each access-right request of the plurality of access-right requests being from a computing device and being for at least a portion of the plurality of access rights, and each access-right request including one or more conditions; determining, based on a request load, an end time of the first time period, the request load being determined based, at least in part on, the plurality of access-right requests received over the network; during a second time period beginning after the end time of the first time period, processing the plurality of access-right requests using a processing system, the processing further comprising: assigning a priority to each access-right request of the plurality of access-right requests, the assignment of the priority being based on each of the included in the access-right request; and associating an access right of the plurality of access rights with a first computing device, the association being based on the assigned priority.
 2. The method of claim 1, further comprising: determining, based on the request load, a start time of the first time period, the request load being determined based, at least in part on, the plurality of access-right requests received over the network.
 3. The method of claim 1, wherein the request load is determined based, at least in part on, a rate of receipt associated with the plurality of access-right requests received over the network.
 4. The method of claim 1, wherein the request load is determined based, at least in part on, a total amount of access-right requests received over a period of time.
 5. The method of claim 1, further comprising: comparing, a rate of receipt associated with the plurality of access-right requests received over the network to a rate of receipt threshold to determine the rate of receipt associated with the plurality of access-right requests is less than the rate of receipt threshold; and modifying, the end time of the first time period, based at least in part on, the rate of receipt associated with the plurality of access-right requests.
 6. The method of claim 1, further comprising: determining the second time period, based at least in part on, an anticipated utilization level of the processing system.
 7. The method of claim 1, further comprising: ranking, one or more of the plurality of access-right requests received over the network; and processing the plurality of access-right requests, based at least in part, on a ranking associated with one or more of the plurality of access-right requests.
 8. A system, comprising: one or more data processors; and a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium containing instructions, which, when executed on the one or more data processors, cause the one or more data processors to perform operations including: storing data representing a plurality of access rights to a resource, each access right corresponding to access-right priority data; receiving, over a network, a plurality of access-right requests during a first time period, each access-right request of the plurality of access-right requests being from a computing device and being for at least a portion of the plurality of access rights, and each access-right request including one or more conditions; determining, based on a request load, an end time of the first time period, the request load being determined based, at least in part on, the plurality of access-right requests received over the network; during a second time period beginning after the end time of the first time period, processing the plurality of access-right requests using a processing system, the processing further comprising: assigning a priority to each access-right request of the plurality of access-right requests, the assignment of the priority being based on each of the one or more conditions included in the access-right request; and associating an access right of the plurality of access rights with a first computing device, the association being based on the assigned priority.
 9. The system of claim 8, wherein the operations further comprise: determining, based on the request load, a start time of the first time period, the request load being determined based, at least in part on, the plurality of access-right requests received over the network.
 10. The system of claim 8, wherein the request load is determined based, at least in part on, a rate of receipt associated with the plurality of access-right requests received over the network.
 11. The system of claim 8, wherein the request load is determined based, at least in part on, a total amount of access-right requests received over a period of time.
 12. The system of claim 8, wherein the operations further comprise: comparing, a rate of receipt associated with the plurality of access-right requests received over the network to a rate of receipt threshold to determine the rate of receipt associated with the plurality of access-right requests is less than the rate of receipt threshold; and modifying, the end time of the first time period, based at least in part on, the rate of receipt associated with the plurality of access-right requests.
 13. The system of claim 8, wherein the operations further comprise: determining the second time period, based at least in part on, an anticipated utilization level of the processing system.
 14. The system of claim 8, wherein the operations further comprise: ranking, one or more of the plurality of access-right requests received over the network; and processing the plurality of access-right requests, based at least in part, on a ranking associated with one or more of the plurality of access-right requests.
 15. A computer-program product tangibly embodied in a non-transitory machine-readable storage medium, including instructions configured to cause a data processing apparatus to perform operations including: storing data representing a plurality of access rights to a resource, each access right corresponding to access-right priority data; receiving, over a network, a plurality of access-right requests during a first time period, each access-right request of the plurality of access-right requests being from a computing device and being for at least a portion of the plurality of access rights, and each access-right request including one or more conditions; determining, based on a request load, an end time of the first time period, the request load being determined based, at least in part on, the plurality of access-right requests received over the network; during a second time period beginning after the end time of the first time period, processing the plurality of access-right requests using a processing system, the processing further comprising: assigning a priority to each access-right request of the plurality of access-right requests, the assignment of the priority being based on each of the one or more conditions included in the access-right request; and associating an access right of the plurality of access rights with a first computing device, the association being based on the assigned priority.
 16. The computer-program product of claim 15, wherein the operations further comprise: determining, based on the request load, a start time of the first time period, the request load being determined based, at least in part on, the plurality of access-right requests received over the network.
 17. The computer-program product of claim 15, wherein the request load is determined based, at least in part on, a rate of receipt associated with the plurality of access-right requests received over the network.
 18. The computer-program product of claim 15, wherein the request load is determined based, at least in part on, a total amount of access-right requests received over a period of time.
 19. The computer-program product of claim 15, wherein the operations further comprise: comparing, a rate of receipt associated with the plurality of access-right requests received over the network to a rate of receipt threshold to determine the rate of receipt associated with the plurality of access-right requests is less than the rate of receipt threshold; and modifying, the end time of the first time period, based at least in part on, the rate of receipt associated with the plurality of access-right requests.
 20. The computer-program product of claim 15, wherein the operations further comprise: determining the second time period, based at least in part on, an anticipated utilization level of the processing system. 